Holy Grail Magna Carta vs. Yeezus: Rap Reviews Are Moronic

Holy Grail Magna Carta vs. Yeezus: Rap Reviews Are Moronic

Rap reviews are moronic. I just reached this epiphany. Critics write hip-hop reviews in a much different manner than other types of music. These other reviews are based more on the music. Rap reviews spend all article long over analyzing the lyrics to death, while spending that same article with a total lack of any articulation about the samples and music used. The producer/DJ is usually mentioned briefly towards the end. Never was this more apparent in reviews for Jay-Z and Kanye's latest album. Many reviews continue to psychoanalyze the place in their lives that each respective rapper is in their personal life. Spin.com saw Jay-Z as confronting middle age in much the same way that Mick Jagger did after the Black and Blue Album. The only difference is calling this that Rolling Stones album is giving Jay-Z too much credit. His latest album is a huge cash grab, lazy, mediocre, and sounds like he did the album in 2 weeks. The Samsung thing was pretty much the most insincere thing I have seen this side of the Rolling Stones and Best Buy, with the uhhh's not withstanding. If Black and Blue represents Jay-Z, then Kanye is still in his Exile on Main Street period. His latest offering Yeezus challenges, but also excites musically. If you don't believe me, watch the trailer for The Wolf of Wall Street. I think it is time to face facts that in a way Jay Z has ridden the coat tails of his primary producer, Kanye West. No wonder he never wanted Ye to take his turn on the microphone. The two very different albums point to an observation about these two artists. Hova is one dimensional, while Kanye is three dimensional. Jay Z is a rapper, while Kanye is a hip hop artist. He raps, sings, creates the music. I just do not believe Jay Z has ever done that successfully or could ever create the complex structures found in the work of Kanye. I liken this to the NBA player who came into the league without a 3 point shot aka Lebron or MJ. Kanye now has a 3 point shot and a deadly one at that. This where my point of this entry comes through to the reader. First, hip hop is heading in the direction where musician expertise will be a prerequisite especially with everyone being sued for use of samples. Second, I believe it is time that these reviews start to recognize that some of these albums may have incredible lyrics, but that matters not in the slightest because the beats sound like total shit. I am always dumbfounded at the people that love rappers like Lil Wayne who may be a great rapper, but the actual music is probably worse than a raccoon being run over in your backyard. Kanye was the first rap artist that created this kind of crossover where he was halfway between rap, hip hop, and r and b. With Yeezus, he has done the same thing with the industrial rock of Nine Inch Nails. Personally, let me just say that as a listener I want to be challenged, but I also desire to a greater extent lots and lots of hooks. In contrast, Jay Z is content to continue where he is at making the same kind of solo album over and over. This may be less of a blame on him as being lazy, but instead he does not have the faith in his musical abilities because he simply does not have those musical abilities. Let us also face facts: Timbaland is Kanye 2.0 not the original. I think we should just wait for Watch the Throne 2 when Kanye is back in the fold.

Let's Talk Daft Punk

Let's Talk Daft Punk

In the past few months, I have observed what people are saying about Daft Punk and offer up these thoughts about their critics...

• It is your fault not Daft Punk's that your expectations were raised much too high. Perhaps, Daft Punk fueled the fire, but can you blame them? You treat them almost like deities. You deserved this. They have basically played you for fools. Daft Punk are out to destroy EDM because there is absolutely no originality in it anymore.
• Daft Punk was originally a rock band. Hence, the origin of the word punk. They once had a guy from Phoenix in their band, so it any wonder they would embrace human music again.
• Disco was the original dance music and what they are saying: let's press reset on dance music because computers are horrible instruments because they cannot convey emotion. The music Skrillex, Deadmau5, Swedish House Mafia seem to have no sense of any structure including the ability to actually think about the music. 
• One of the great quotes I heard was Daft Punk grew tired of being copied. Deadmau5 had even tried to copy the blueprint exactly of their sampling machine. What a douchebag. Daft Punk are essentially saying, you copied everything else, try to copy this.  The fans criticizing this album have become more boisterous possibly because they see Daft Punk's new approach to dance music as a threat to changing their favorite artist's music.
• Critics also fail to understand that we have a point in the history of music that sometimes a type of music must take a step back to move forward. Everything old becomes new again. For example, what about that pesky synthesizer? It made a prominent return in recent years, then why not disco? The Strokes did it with 70's cool punk like the Velvet Underground, then why not disco? 
• I can now see Julian Casablancas kinship with Daft Punk. Both had a groundbreaking, age defining 2001 album. Both seem to seek to move their music as far away from that sound as possible. They seem to feel too defined by that and if it were anyone else, they could get away with it. Yet, fans and critics alike, want to have their cake and eat it too. They want an era defining experience like that album, but they want them to recreate that sound too. Lightning only strikes once and that age defining experience is also a product of the times. You release that album now and it doesn't even make a dent in our collective psyche because times are different, conditions are different, this country's different, people are different. Daft Punk had to do something completely different or they would have never put anything out to begin with. 
• Going along with this is the idea that the music in this album is simple, too simple. Anybody could have done it. They are dead wrong on that point too. I heard Get Lucky used hundreds and hundreds of takes before the song was finally put together. 
• These songs are very good and very diverse. It sounds much like a labor of love for the members of Daft Punk. They know about all these people from the 70's and 80's and think they are being lost in the shuffle. At first, I felt they wanted to just kill EDM because all they did was copy them, but instead I understood their greater mission here. Daft Punk is out to kill the computer. No longer do they want dj's by themselves in hotel rooms creating albums. Get your fucking ass in the studio and surround  yourself with actual musicians.
• Finally, Daft Punk really does not give a shit. In interviews leading up to the album, they basically said EDM artists like Deadmau5 suck and they would never listen to them. Looks like Daft Punk will get the last laugh anyway after shattering Spotify records left and right. Sometimes your album succeeds despite what the critics say.
• Of course, this is only my opinion and I could be wrong.

Music Critics Make Shitty Historians

I have an advanced degree in history. Over time I have noticed many major music reviews tend to cover the span of the bands history as they review their latest album. The one issue with this is that these reviewers are pretty goddamn shitty at it. These reviews fail to put into proper context a bands history. Again and again they use subjective methods off the top of their head to offer limited perspective on what a band was and how they are perceived currently In popular culture. Their views are impressionistic and altogether wrong. These critics only remember what were their observations at the time which may have changed but in no way can this ever be objective. No evidence is ever offered up as to where they got their information and this in fact causes a problem. In true historic scholarship evidence is presented to support argument but in today's music criticism this evidence is discarded it observations are made at random to be presumed as fact. It is a fucking joke. For example time and time again for the strokes new record I have seen reviews that when they were making the album angles Julian Casablanca's walked out on the recording sessions. These reviews make it sound like the lead singer of the strokes told the other members to basically go to hell and make the album themselves. This could not be further from the truth. No where do these reviews mention the fact that he was still finishing up touring his solo album. He emailed his recordings partially because he was not going to be done for a while with his solo tour But nowhere is this benefit of the doubt ever mentioned in any of these articles. Stuff like this just fucking pisses me off because I just want to say to a majority of these reviews why don't you fucking do some research before you goddamn write a review.

Pitchfork.com

Alas, we come now to Pitchfork.com. I love Pitchfork's festival. I dig some of the musician's they get to go there. For example, Vampire Weekend, Trail of Dead, Modest Mouse are all cool acts to see there. Yet, their idea of music criticism leaves a lot to be desired. They are in love with the idea of being completely indie. Even more so, than they are in love with the idea of good music. As the ecard saying goes, Pitchfork.com is so indie that they saw a band by themselves in an underground room then killed the band so they would be the only ones ever to see them. One of the first things they like to do is punish bands for wanting to make money and upgrade to better tours, equipment, houses. Second, one particular review of Pitchfork wonders whether Pitchfork likes music at all anymore. Third, they have to be completely anonymous. These tools need to understand that I want an honest review of the bands we all know, not a shit talking, dishonest review because you'd rather highlight your crap, no name, bullshit, awful fucking band. I guess what seemed like a venture that was honest and true in the beginning has become an endless mission to become the coolest hipster on the planet. Pitchfork needs a wakeup call. Here is a newsflash. Hipsters are dead. EDM in no way embraces the hipster. Nobody wants to be called a hipster. They run this site as if it were 2005. The final part of the utter hilarity that is Pitchfork comes in the fact that this site is the embodiment of hypocrisy. I am reminded of when the Strokes new album came out, Comedown Machine. They previewed the album acting like it was this buzzworthy album then proceeded to trash it a bit. Also, they called them irrelevant as they proceeded to sell Converse shoes on the same page. What a fucking crock of shit they are. These pretentious douchebags don't even let you comment on their reviews. Putting up blinders to the truth that they are all a bunch of haters with no style no substance and no integrity.

My Reply to Spin on The Strokes Review

Nobody much asks what the Strokes will do next anymore. -Keith Harris
Am I wrong in that everyone wants to write about how nobody cares about the Strokes anymore, but in reality much of the media does care very much what they do whether it be fascination, interest, ridicule, jealousy, I knew it, or I told you so. I really did not see this kind of interest in a new album like the Killers with absolutely no pr whatsoever. Where was the Vevo concert? Where were the magazine covers? Where were the interviews? You know who does not care...The Strokes. I listened to the new Phoenix album which this album has been compared to...The Strokes do a better Phoenix impression on Comedown Machine than Phoenix did for the past 13 years except for 1901. Next up, not in this review, but still prevalent are the endless unoriginal headlines that this is letdown machine. My God, be original you dumbasses. Next we have to hear the endless psycho/cultural/poetic/intellectual bullshit about the Strokes, their legacy, their history, their brand, their place in time. Finally, since this review you have released 2 articles specifically mentioning the Strokes with the obvious point to show how irrelevant they are. Quick tip: to make a band seem irrelevant...stop f'ing writing about them... How about that awesome 6 bitches?